Jump to content

Text Message today


Syd

Recommended Posts

Today I saw a text message giving Venables new name and brief details of his new crime. The text is alleged to have originated from a disgruntled prison officer.

 

I have absolutely no idea if this is correct but does anyone want me to post it or rather does anyone think I should post it and does anyone think it would stay on view for more than 2 seconds if I did post it :D :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If, as it has been suggested , that he has been arrested on allegations of possessing child pornography, then we must not give his defence lawyers the slightest reason to get him acquitted on the grounds of not getting a fair trial/hearing. And that is what will happen if this frenzied witch hunt is allowed to escalate.

 

I, along with half the country have had texts saying that his new identity is that of the guy living in Blackpool who's face was plastered all over facebook, the retards posting on there, obviously didn't compute that venables is inside on remand, and this other guy is walking up and down to his local shops.

 

Having said all that, IF he is ever convicted, and it has been hinted that he might not ever get charged, then he should no longer be given the anonymity he was given on release, he's had one chance and blown it.

IMO the government should have spent money on a 9mm Glock and emptied the clip into the pair of them 17 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tracker

This information should not be in the public domain as it being there would serve no useful purpose other than to incite hatred and vigilantism by a small minority and that is not, and should never become, the British way of justice.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big difference between "what the public's interested in" (especially when you bear in mind which daily publication has the biggest circulation!) and "what's in the public interest."

 

It's unfortunate we can no longer trust government ministers when they say something is, or isn't "in the public interest," since they've taken to confusing that with what's in THEIR interests.

 

However, on this issue, all I need to know is that this character has been caught doing whatever he's done, and is now back behind bars.

 

There would have been a genuine "public interest" in why he was released in the first place, but at this stage any further information is unnecessary - especially if it could prejudice some further court action. (Although the terms of his "life licence" should mean they don't need to prosecute him again, they can just re-activate the original life sentence).

 

I understand the reaction of Jamie's mum, from an emotional point of view, but I'd respectfully suggest that even she doesn't "need" to know, nor is she "entitled" to know, as knowing what else this man may have done won't lessen her grief in any way at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One simple question please to anyone who thinks it WOULD be a good idea to know his true identity: WHY?

 

It would not solve anything, it would only make it difficult, if not impossible, to try him in court and get a 'fair' trial on this particular case.

 

He has NOT been convicted - we don't know the full facts and whilst is it definitely possible for him to have done whatever it is they believe he has, it has not been PROVED to be so, so there is also the chance he has NOT done it too.

 

I certainly don't want to be part of a society who carry out a judgement BEFORE a conviction has been proven. That would open up a whole heap of trouble for everyone ... mob rule OK? I think and hope not.

 

We'll all find out in time more information I'm sure, but at the moment it would be better to let the justice system deal with it to the letter of the law and make sure that any alleged wrong-doing is proven and a suitable sentence handed down if that is the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think Venables will even go to trial, I think the powers that be will say a trial is not in the public interest and they will just revoke his license and bang him up.

If he did go to trial any jury would know it is Venables in the dock, the security would be so tight giving away his identity, it is a case of wait and see what happens?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another example of just how easy it is with modern communications such as text and the social network sites for information which may or may not be accurate to be passed on. Unverified nonsense immediately becomes fact. As an example Wikipedia is now widely used as a source of factual knowledge, even by students at university. Dangerous!!! Add to this the flames of desire to be the first to know/tell then you almost get a chinese whispers effect.

I agree with the sentiments expressed previously and hope that sanity will return and prevail on all things. Dream on>:-)

 

Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My view is that if the guy has committed an offence, whatever it may be, then it should be in the public domain.

 

In no way would I condone a lynching. Nor do I advocate one. However if and only if he's commtted an offence contrary to common law, then he should not be treated any differently.

 

Regardless of what happened to him in the past, then he should in my opinion, be treated in exactly the same way as if I broke the law.

 

Name up in court, court number, found guilty or not guilty and the verdict (s) in the local press. If his anonymity is breached, that's his failure, caused by his (alleged) offending.

 

There are two roads to go down every time, if he's chosen to offend, the courts should publish and protect us from him.

 

I agree with Donna's last paragraph apart from the shooting element.

 

Martyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...